Gun Control

[ExCopInPhilly]

I am not going to waste everyone's time with the usual cliches on why gun control doesn't work, and why we all have the right to keep and bear arms, we all know that or we wouldn't be here. I will, however, pose a different opinion on gun control that will be a little different stance, and may even make a few people here angry.

Let me start by saying, I totally oppose gun control for the average, law abiding citizen. Call me the optimist, but I still hope that most people try to live law abiding, good lives, but I do agree with the fact that we need to control the criminal element's availability of handguns. However, like the war on drugs, it is a long costly battle that must be attacked properly, or the only persons that will be hurt by public policy are the good people.

Gun control is such a ridiculous term, just by it's nature, because the reality is that all anyone really wants is crime control. In my years in law enforcement, I can only remember very few crimes ever committed using a legally purchased firearm, that was bought by the person who committed the crime. Contrary to popular belief, criminals are pretty intelligent people, in a lot of cases who have just used their intelligence in the wrong way. Having been a narcotics investigator, I saw criminals who ran their drug operations as efficiently as a Fortune 500 company. That said, they often times know the law as well as the police officers who are trying to catch them, and in many cases better. Gun control, as proposed by many lawmakers will not make it hard for the criminal to obtain a firearm to hurt you or I with, it will only make it more difficult for us to get a handgun to defend ourselves. Just as the war on drugs hasn't made it any more difficult to buy drugs, it has only decreased the supply some, and made the prices go up, thereby increasing the amount of violence attributed to the trade. However, I would never advocate the legalization of drugs, and know we have to stay the fight, but maybe with the same nuances that I am going to suggest in the crime control strategy, not gun control.

I read a case recently where two young men committed a murder with a handgun that they had purchased from a third young man. I was saddened, not only, by the fact that a person had been senselessly killed, but also by the punishment handed down to everyone involved. The two young men who actually committed the crime with the gun were severely sentenced, and rightfully so, but the young man who sold them the handgun was only given probation! Perhaps, I am not as educated as the judge who made the decision, but perhaps I have far more common sense than he does, because without the sale of the gun, this senseless murder would never have happened. I sat amazed by the train of thought that must have not ever taken place when the judge and prosecutor decided that this was the correct course of action for a crime of this magnitude.

This, and many other cases that I have read recently have, led me to the following conclusions:

1. Increased penalties for "Straw Purchases" - How much more can really be said? The penalty for the person who does a straw purchase of a handgun for any person, that is used in the commission of the crime, should be equivalent to that of a conspirator to commit the act. That means, that if you buy a gun for someone who can't buy a gun for themselves, and it is used to commit a murder, then you are guilty of conspiracy to commit murder. This should be a non-negotiable! By putting a handgun in the hands of a criminal, you know and understand that there is a legitimate chance that the gun will be used for criminal purposes, so you should be punished for providing the means and opportunity for the crime to be committed. That is textbook conspiracy. Make the punishment commensurate with the severity of the crime, and it will serve to lessen the number of street level sales of handguns.

2. Criminal checks for the purchase of ammunition - As a long time firearm owner, I know that without any ammunition then my guns are just expensive paperweights or boomerangs that will never come back. Perhaps again, I am missing something but we make a person jump through a series of hoops to purchase a firearm, but then we sell the ammunition for them over the counter at WalMart. WalMart, the same company who refuses to sell handguns, is the largest distributor of handgun ammunition in the country. If a criminal can purchase a handgun on the street illegally, why would we make it easy for him to walk into a retail store and get the ammunition for that same illegal firearm. We, who live in Pennsylvania, have to undergo a significant criminal history check to purchase a firearm, and an even more extensive check to carry one. As inconvenient as it is for the law abiding gun owner, it is appreciated if it serves its' purpose to keep handguns out of the hands of criminals, but what good is a handgun without the ammunition. I, for one, would not mind the additional time of having the same PICS check run for me to buy ammunition, if that will help to limit the number of criminals who can actually buy the bullets for their illegal guns. The upgrade, that we just suffered through, of the PICS system, should allow for a web-based, completely secure, Go/No Go, PICS check on anyone who wishes to buy ammunition. This check could be instantaneous, and would serve to limit the amount of ammunition avcailable to illegal gun carriers, and would also allow for the prosecution of persons who provide the actual deadly instruments, the ammunition, to the criminals.

3. National registry for the mentally impaired - Allow the NCIC to maintain a national record of individuals who have been adjudicated by the legal process to be a threat to themselves or others. This record should be secure and available to law enforcement entities only, on an as needed basis. I DO NOT support the releasing of that information to anyone just as a routine, to include law enforcement, but I would support it being used before we sell someone a firearm or the ammunition for a firearm. Those of us who are law abiding citizens will not be concerned about the use of that information to prevent a "disturbed" individual from purchasing a firearm, if it can prevent incidents like Virginia Tech and the DC sniper. Both of which were carried out by individuals with known histories of questionable mental health.

As I sit down and write this, I am wondering how we can get our legislators and the people we choose to govern us to understand the need for crime control, not gun control. When George W. Bush was governor of Texas, he never acted upon any legislation that affected the right of the law abiding citizen to keep and bear arms, but he was clear on his anti-crime stance, and crime in that state went down. I, when I was a police officer, would hear the very criminals that I dealt with make very clear statements on the lines between committing a crime that would get them prosecuted federally, versus the crimes that would get them prosecuted at the State or Local level. Why, because they were afraid of the stiffer penalties that would be imposed under the Federal system of "mandatory minimums". I don't know how anyone else thinks, but I want the criminal to be afraid of going to jail forever, maybe then they will think twice about committing the crimes. Please, if anyone reads this or has the opportunity to talk to a legislator, help them to understand that gun control means nothing to the criminal, crime control is what we want as citizens. A system that works for us and protects our rights, and not one that negates our rights for the benefit of the criminal. Everyone fights for the rights of the criminal, who abandoned his rights when he committed the crime, but who fights for ours!

[novice]

1. Increased penalties for "Straw Purchases"-- really like it a lot

2. Criminal checks for the purchase of ammunition-- hate it. too much regulation, already.

3. National registry for the mentally impaired-- maybe. the key word is adjudication. On just whose say-so will the decision be made? will the process be uniform and fair, or arbitrary and prejudicial, like most gun control laws?

Out of the population with mental health issues, an overwhelming number are harmless, and their issues temporary. And their numbers are large: over a lifetime, more than 25% of the population, something better than 10% at any one time. And lots of combat veterans, who deserve better than to be branded crazy.

Everyone with a gun and prozac isn't a Hinckley or Cho. Murder is still illegal and wrong. That works for most people.

[RoyJackson]

Since a similar thread with similar ideas was posted in another PFOA forum...

1) No problem...agree 100%

2) Hmmmmm...how about internet purchases? If I buy bulk, that's where I buy. A lot of folks would disagree with this one.

3) Basically agree...my concerns about this is the potential for abuse (as the Lautenburg Amendment dealing with spousal abuse can be abused). The American Psychiatric Association and AMA are on record as being pro-gun control and their political agenda could lead to abuses.
Also, there has to be a method that is both clear and funded to ensure someone adjudicated has a way to regain his or her rights. As an example...someone going through depression (death in family, loss of a job, post-traumatic stress) could be erroneously judged...even by well meaning family members, for a temporary condition.

[LastManOut]

Just a side question on ExCop's post, wasn't it during Jimmy Carter that all the mentally impaired were turned out from the mental institutions? I was trying to think how did the Founding Fathers miss that one, but 'back in the day' they would have had the truly mentally ill committed (burned at the stake a century earlier ). So anyone could "..keep and bear arms." no restrictions on illness, felons, wife-beaters, etc.

In Penna.'s Constitution I believe it states the commonwealth is to train the unorganized militia (all men 17-54(?)) and provide the ammunition to do so.

That doesn't sound like ammo control or a combat veteran data base.

[knight0334]

1. Yes, I'm all for increased penalties for straw purchase - so long as a person gift from one person to another isn't considered a straw purchase. example: I buy a .22rf for the kid's(not blood or legal relation) 18th B-day gift, he'll receive it a day before his actual 18 b-day.. Since I'm not buying it for myself, nor is he my blood or adopted child - my gift of a 22 rifle could be construed as a straw purchase by a crafty DA, LEO, or lawyer.

2. While I am absolutely for the Insta-Check system for gun purchases, an ammo check is a little overboard. I would be in favor of requiring ID to prove age, and seller's voluntary logging of purchases - but a PICS call would just run up the cost of ammo(there is a fee to use it) and tie up the Insta-Check system. Also, Federal law prohibits anyone from using the NICS for anything but gun purchases(dealers) and for gun transfers and permit checks for LEO's. Since PA's PICS digs into the NICS, it is bound by the Federal law.

3. I have a problem with registering anyone, but I do have a problem with mentally ill people having guns. There are people who are perfectly sane that are listed as mentally ill due to some court opinion - thus restricting their rights. But there are cases like the VaTech... Any registry is a bad thing from the get-go, and the likeliness of it getting worse is high. You could be 303'd by your neighbor Officer Joe Diddle, then he could pull strings with the magistrate to have adjudication on the 5th day - all because you wore your pistol in the backyard as you BBQ'd.

[rspowers]

Chris Rock on gun control -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJGcrUk2eE

[pirateron]

In summary...
Give More power to the government and law enforcement.
Give Another system to run a check on all of us Legal, Sane, Law abiding citizens. To inconvenience us even more when we have to prove that we are Sane.
And Limit the ease of which we as law-abiding citizens can purchase our lawful ammo.
Do you approve of Citizen ID chips implanted in our skin as well? think of how easy it would be to keep track of all we did then... Law enforcement would be virtually gauranteed 100% arrest rates if every one had a microchip implanted in them. We could program the guns to only fire for whomever bought it so we would KNOW who done it. No-one could sell a gun illegally. Illegally purchased Ammunition would be useless too. And of course the chip would be able to be upgradable, so if someone that owns a gun suddenly starts to get treated for depression, we could download to the chip that he is insane and his gun would not work.
Think of all the other possibilities, after all, if it saves 1 life, its worth it... Right???

[WhiteWolf]

While I'm sure that denying gun sales to criminals and the mentally ill is a good idea, I also know that killing everyone of a certain group also seemed like a good idea to some people. (ok, not a fair comparison)

What I don't understand is how the constitution of our United States can protect a right, and the government can take that right from a certain group through a simple law. I don't want to sound paranoid, but if the gov't can legally take a constitutionally protected right away from one group it can take it from all groups. This is what the bill of rights was specifically set up to protect us from.

My solution, dissolve all gun laws for the following reasons:
1. They are all unconstitutional
2. The criminals will get them anyway
3. Taking away the rights of the "mentally ill" is no solution. Remember in China and the old USSR that not liking the socialist dictatorship was grounds for commitment in a psychiatric institution
4. Former criminals (yes, I think we should remove their weapons while they are in prison) and the "mentally ill" have just the same right to protect themselves as we do.

Finally, a good idea or good intent cannot be the reason for dissolving our constitutionally protected rights. This only leads to one place, and I don't want to see my country go there.

(disclaimer: I know this isn’t a perfect world and that I am way too idealistic. I blame this on my upbringing and study of American history. It really isn’t possible to read about the founding of this country and not get a bad case of Love of Country)

[Frenchy]

Wow!!! What a can of worms we have here.

First of all, there are states that have a card (FOIDS) to allow the population to buy bullets. Does it work? Who knows, there is no serial number on bullets. How do you register some thing with out a serial number?

Limiting people who buy bulk would seem to work for the casual eye, But that is only because the casual eye never bought 1000 rounds to go practice at the range on a weekly or even daily basis before a match. They also never bought 1000+ rounds for the family to go shooting at any given time; they see 50 rounds as more then enough.

The mental ill issue: Mentally ill people do not have a suicidal problem in most cases, they are very happy people; they don’t know anything but eat sleep and fun. Yes there are mentally challenged people who lead very productive lives, and can never have a gun, they are seen by the general public as being mentally ill. (See retarded)

There are countries America included until not too long ago, that saw Dyslexia as a mental illness. Today Americans do not see Dyslexia as retardation, In fact it is, it is a situation where many people lead very natural lives yet have problems with some fairly simple concepts. Right left, what is the difference turn! A or 4 W or M , 3 or E are common dyslexic problems, how can some one who sees W and M be considered normal? (Don’t think I am flaming dyslexics here, I have 3 forms of Dyslexia) Doe My being Dyslexic make me a dangerous person? Well Possibly if you ask me to turn left and I turn right on a one way street I would become dangerous, but in every day life, I live with this and people learn to point the way I should turn.

The real problem is not mental “Illness” so much as a specific par of the Mental illness group.

Depression, this is the rough part because every one is depressed at times to a certain level. Every one who reads this at one time or an other lost a dog, or a cat or a rabbit or a family member and became depressed. You lost a girl friend/ Boyfriend, you lost a job, and you lost money, your car broke down, you where not able to go to that concert because you where working… (why do you think they call sick days Mental health days)
You said some thing that was rebuked the wrong way, A slip of the toungue and your depressed!

The human mind is so tender to this sort of mental depression; the doctors don’t even ask you questions, not feeling good? Here Prozac! Problems with the kids? Valium!!
Been hurt in school? Ritalin! Yet this is overseen, the people who mainly cause school shootings are on these meds and the other popular med administered by parents, TV and some form of game. (usually a violent game where you die and get to live again) Reality suddenly loses every aspect of what you and I might consider “sanity” and death becomes free. Freedom is gained by pressing the start button; there is no consequence to death in games. There is only added bonus rounds.

If 10 people walked into a psychologist’s office, 11 of them would have to be declared Insane or “Mentally disturbed” when they walked out. How do I get my math?

There are people now becoming more aware that in order to solve a crime, you have to have a “Criminal mind”… Oh you seen the show, the one about police investigating others and profiling them and coming out with the solution… As one actor says it, “we solve the crimes because we can see them in our minds, we hunt them down and catch them because we know how they think…” The only difference is they are “Licenced” “ Sanctioned” Is that not mentally unstable? So now you walk into the Psychologist’s office, you tell him you once thought of hurting your dog… You are mentally unstable, a bomb waiting to explode! And the Psychologist who prescribes you the meds to get better… He is sane? He has seen more destruction, more violence and studied this because he is stronger then you are?

So now, 10 people walk into a room, do therapy on death, abuse and every sordid thing the average person is completely scared of, and we call them (all 11 of them) sane because they are investigators, and one is a Doctor?
But based on what these 10 people feel is “Abnormal” the rest of the population can be seen as “Mentally ill”
Lost your job, went out drinking, told the neighbor to go fuck himself… You are mentally ill!!!

Maybe its time we put a new perspective on Mental illness. Because by those standards, every one I know has been mentally ill. Including the professionals who tell others they are mentally ill. Every one I know has had at least one bad day where they did not “understand” their emotions, and could not find their way out. Fortunately, Depression has a great cure, the Human hug!
It will get better soon, things are looking up! Encouragement will take most people out of depression in a heartbeat. Knowing your not the only person out there with a problem will help solve many of this worlds mysteries.

Maybe the cure to all this maddness is that we start to communicate with each other, bring the family yolk back into play, and stop being fed pills by doctors and video games by the ones we love the most.

Ok guys, Group Hug!!!

[ExCopInPhilly]

Thank you everyone for the feedback and posts. Like I said, this was just me sitting down, at the time, writing what I was thinking. It is no way is supposed to be completely thought out ideas, just my off cuff ramblings. I don't think we will ever, nor will the legislators ever, arrive at a plan without effective discussion and reasonable back and forth between us. Again, thank you for reading me ramble, and for the great feedback.